So Gionta has a grudge? Certainly hope it was a joke.
As I previously stated, I've seen PK downtown in Mtl quite a few times going as far back as early summer all the way to mid december (sometimes on a weekly basis). So I know for a fact he's been in Mtl often.

And how did PK carry the team to last place?

Gionta might have been joking, but if not, you're right he was wrong.

PK had to have been in Montreal he was on CTV News a couple times during the lockout. He did the weather for Lori Graham one night and sports for Randy Tieman another night.

8 year contract, sign him now... Loves Montreal, is buddies with Price (you know our "other" young superstar), and is becoming a fantastic spokesman for the team. 8 years takes him to 31 and shows Bergevin is committed to winning... Other teams lock up their superstars, let's do the same here.

Marvkov has definately been on the shelf most of the time PK has been in the lineup. When Markov did come back last year, he went back to being the #1 guy and I don't see why he wouldn't this year, especially considering he's been playing and playing well in the KHL.

PK was the default #1 when Markov wasn't around but now that he's back, I don't see Markov not being the go to guy, at least not the 1A yo Subban's 1B.

I don't know what games you were watching. PK still logged more time than him. Anyone and their mother can see that PK is the #1 guy. Markov at this point is not. He may regain his spot but at this point in time, he's behind Subban.

I don't know what games you were watching. PK still logged more time than him. Anyone and their mother can see that PK is the #1 guy. Markov at this point is not. He may regain his spot but at this point in time, he's behind Subban.

WTF does winning % have to do with one player? Give me a break.

It's not only about winning percentage, though it is telling in the case of a defenseman who logs big minutes. The teams wins with Markov in the lineup more often than it loses. Moreso though It's about who is the better player. Markov is superior in just about every department. PK hasn't been able to quarterback the powerplay like Markov, he doesn't see the ice like Markov (think about all those cross ice passes for one timers, the two zone breakout passes etc). Markov is a game-controlling/ game-changing defenseman and in my opinion is superior defensively and offensively. PK has trouble getting shots through, still needs to get that big slap shot, finds himself out of position sometimes etc...You're talking about one of the best in the league here. I love PK, but in my opinion it's not even close. Markov is extremely underrated. The only area where I can think of right now where PK probably has the edge is physicality.

It's not only about winning percentage, though it is telling in the case of a defenseman who logs big minutes. The teams wins with Markov in the lineup more often than it loses. Moreso though It's about who is the better player. Markov is superior in just about every department. PK hasn't been able to quarterback the powerplay like Markov, he doesn't see the ice like Markov (think about all those cross ice passes for one timers, the two zone breakout passes etc). Markov is a game-controlling defenseman and in my opinion is superior defensively and offensively. PK has trouble getting shots through, still needs to get that big slap shot, finds himself out of position sometimes etc...You're talking about one of the best in the league here. I love PK, but in my opinion it's not even close. Markov is extremely underrated. The only area where I can think of right now where PK probably has the edge is physicality.

I don't know what games you were watching. PK still logged more time than him. Anyone and their mother can see that PK is the #1 guy. Markov at this point is not. He may regain his spot but at this point in time, he's behind Subban.

WTF does winning % have to do with one player? Give me a break.

I'll repeat:

Quote:

Originally Posted by shutehinside

yes but remeber that Markov had just come back from his second major knee surgery and the Habs were already out of the playoffs. Markov was inthe line up more to get his feet wet than to compete. Many people were saying to leave him out all together until he for sure knew his knee was 100% during the off season.

With his play in the KHL and another summer of rehab, there's no reason now to think his knee isn't at 100% and he canbare the ice time he used to play before the injury. He's averaged more than 21min. a gme in the KHL this year.

What does winning % have to do with anything?? Really? If a team wins the vast majority of the games they play with a particular player and loses the vast majority of games without him, then yes, I put stock in that. If Habs lost most games that Price played and won most games he didn't play, I don' tthink he'd be in the lineup for very long...

What does winning % have to do with anything?? Really? If a team wins the vast majority of the games they play with a particular player and loses the vast majority of games without him, then yes, I put stock in that. If Habs lost most games that Price played and won most games he didn't play, I don' tthink he'd be in the lineup for very long...

My point is winning% can't be tied to one player unless it's a goalie. You can't look at the team's winning% with Subban and form a conclusion about his value. That's silly because you completely ignore all other factors that contribute to wins and losses. It's silly.

My point is winning% can't be tied to one player unless it's a goalie. You can't look at the team's winning% with Subban and form a conclusion about his value. That's silly because you completely ignore all other factors that contribute to wins and losses. It's silly.

The best example of this came in 2009-10, the last time Markov played a significant number of games. Including the Stanley Cup Playoffs, the Canadiens were 29-16-8 in the 53 games in which Markov dressed and 15-23-2 when he didn't. Overall, since the start of the 2009-10 season, the Canadiens have a 38-22-13 record with Markov in the lineup and an 84-86-21 record without him.

This is a large sample size on a team that was built around a transition offense that stoped transitioning once Markov was on the shelf. Last year we finished last in the conference without Markov playing the vast majority of the games. When Markov was in the lineup, the Habs went to the placeoffs and competed in them.

These aren't causal numbers here. There is a significant statistical relationship with Markov in the line up than without. I didn't invent these numbers.

The people saying Markov is better than Subban have no appreciation for the importance of defensive play.

Yes, scoring points is important... but so is preventing points scored by the other team.

I think Markov has been out of the line up too long and people have short term memory or a case of the "what have you done for me lately's." Markov is one of the best defensive players out there. He was also a PK anchor and trusted in his own end. Ask Ovy who the hardest defensman is to play against and he'll tell you it's Markov?

PK should go on to be a great NHLer but please don't disregard how good Markov has been for us in an effort to boost PK. His play will speak for itself. If you were to ask any Habs fan which of the 2 players they'd want over the past 2 1/2 years, pre injury Markov or PK, I doubt anyone would pick PK. That's not to saying that could change going forward but it hasn't happened yet. Look at the numbers, they don't lie.

What does winning % have to do with anything?? Really? If a team wins the vast majority of the games they play with a particular player and loses the vast majority of games without him, then yes, I put stock in that. If Habs lost most games that Price played and won most games he didn't play, I don' tthink he'd be in the lineup for very long...

Using this logic, Crosby should be considered a non factor since the Peguins did so well while he was out.

The best example of this came in 2009-10, the last time Markov played a significant number of games. Including the Stanley Cup Playoffs, the Canadiens were 29-16-8 in the 53 games in which Markov dressed and 15-23-2 when he didn't. Overall, since the start of the 2009-10 season, the Canadiens have a 38-22-13 record with Markov in the lineup and an 84-86-21 record without him.

This is a large sample size on a team that was built around a transition offense that stoped transitioning once Markov was on the shelf. Last year we finished last in the conference without Markov playing the vast majority of the games. When Markov was in the lineup, the Habs went to the placeoffs and competed in them.

These aren't causal numbers here. There is a significant statistical relationship with Markov in the line up than without. I didn't invent these numbers.

Do you think we have a same or even comparable team for those years? Have you taken into account its no longer the same team. Cammalleri, Kostitsyn(s), Hamrlik, Spacek, Moore, Bergeron.. are gone and Gomez who is no longer Gomez who was decent in the transition game in 09-10. We have no real sample for Markov and this current Habs team, they are not comparable. Markov is also older, which may or may not come in to factor, but it is there.

These stats may have been significant when comparing him with a roster from beginning of last year back. However this team has changed significantly, which makes those stats useless for games going forward.

If we take the latest samples, which are last seasons 13 games, the habs were 5-3-5, which is pretty decent point wise. 6 games went to OT or shootouts and we lost 5 of them. Winning more of those could help.

We also don't have much data on having both Subban and Markov in the lineup, I think this could be more telling.

I think many people forget just how good Andrei Markov was in his prime. At one time, he was one of the best defenseman in the world, if you ask me.

I certainly don't forget how good he was. The Markov you are talkiing about however lives only in our hopes and dreams now. I really hope he can achieve even 80% of what he did before he started getting injured. People just need to realize this is not very likely. The Habs need to deal with what they have today, not what we had in the past.

Trying to capture past glory has been a thorn for this organization for the past couple of decades. Eyes on the road boys, less concern about the rear view mirror.

Do you think we have a same or even comparable team for those years? Have you taken into account its no longer the same team. Cammalleri, Kostitsyn(s), Hamrlik, Spacek, Moore, Bergeron.. are gone and Gomez who is no longer Gomez who was decent in the transition game in 09-10. We have no real sample for Markov and this current Habs team, they are not comparable. Markov is also older, which may or may not come in to factor, but it is there.

These stats may have been significant when comparing him with a roster from beginning of last year back. However this team has changed significantly, which makes those stats useless for games going forward.

If we take the latest samples, which are last seasons 13 games, the habs were 5-3-5, which is pretty decent point wise. 6 games went to OT or shootouts and we lost 5 of them. Winning more of those could help.

We also don't have much data on having both Subban and Markov in the lineup, I think this could be more telling.

I'm not sure what you mean with your post. Could you please elaborate.

If I'm not supposed to use the last 2 full seasons that Markov was in and out of the line up, than what else am I supposed to use. The facts are they facts. When he was in the line up, they won. When he wasn't they lost. I think that's pretty clear. Saying they have a different team now and so on doesn't change what their record was with and without Markov. Trying to extrapolate anything from that is futile and only muddy's the waters, which is why you're not seeing it for what it is. Habs are much better with Markov than not. Don't see how you're arguing against this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drive425

Makes no difference using that logic.

If a team continues to win when a player is gone, means he's irrelevant.

This bizarro logic is giving me a headache.

The logic is simple. Pens have 2 other #1 centres in Malkin and Staal. So when Crosby went down, those 2 stepped up and were able to help pick up the slack Crosby left behind due to their incredible talent. It's no surprise that Malkin won the Heart Trophy in Crosby's absence due to his steller play.

As for Montreal, they didn't have any defensmen able to replace Markov, including PK. So when Markov went down, they traded for a bunch of different defensmen to pick up his slack and do it by commitee, but weren't able to do so. Hence, they're terrible record without Markov.

Does that makes sense? If not, let me know and I'll try to clarify further.

Anyone claiming Markov is the #1 defenseman going into the season is dreaming in technicolor. He has to earn that spot back from PK at this point, and while he has the talent to do it its now a question of whether his body will allow him to do it.

Anyone claiming Markov is the #1 defenseman going into the season is dreaming in technicolor. He has to earn that spot back from PK at this point, and while he has the talent to do it its now a question of whether his body will allow him to do it.

Anyone saying otherwise is being a homer.

You totaly agree with "he has only played two full seasons in the NHL and has yet to establish himself as a true #1 defenseman on and off the ice" yet don't think Markov is the #1.

The logic is simple. Pens have 2 other #1 centres in Malkin and Staal. So when Crosby went down, those 2 stepped up and were able to help pick up the slack Crosby left behind due to their incredible talent. It's no surprise that Malkin won the Heart Trophy in Crosby's absence due to his steller play.

As for Montreal, they didn't have any defensmen able to replace Markov, including PK. So when Markov went down, they traded for a bunch of different defensmen to pick up his slack and do it by commitee, but weren't able to do so. Hence, they're terrible record without Markov.

Does that makes sense? If not, let me know and I'll try to clarify further.

I see your point. Earlier it sounded like the soul reason the Habs went into the crapper was because Markov went down with injury. In fact, it was that plus a host of other injuries/poor trades/bad luck that contributed to the 3rd overall pick we earned last year.